DOCSLIB.ORG

Effective Pavement Marking Materials and Applications for Portland Cement Concrete Roadways

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Effective Pavement Marking Materials and Applications for Portland Cement Concrete Roadways Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-03/4150-2 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date EFFECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKING MATERIALS AND July 2003 APPLICATIONS FOR PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE ROADWAYS 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Timothy J. Gates, H. Gene Hawkins, Jr., and Elisabeth R. Rose Report 4150-2 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project No. 0-4150 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Research: Research and Technology Implementation Office April 2002 – August 2002 P. O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Research Project Title: Evaluation of Pavement Marking Effectiveness 16. Abstract This report describes the tasks of a study conducted to identify effective pavement marking materials and application procedures on Portland cement concrete (PCC) roadways in Texas. The researchers reviewed relevant literature, reviewed data from the National Transportation Product Evaluation Program (NTPEP), surveyed state departments of transportation, surveyed material manufacturers, and analyzed cost- effectiveness of various materials. Based on findings from the research tasks, the researchers generated a number of recommendations for pavement markings on PCC roadways in Texas, which include: • Use epoxy materials for long-term applications under the majority of traffic conditions, • Use preformed tape for long-term applications under very heavy traffic, and • Use TxDOT specification thermoplastic only for short-term applications with low to medium traffic. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Pavement Marking, PCC, Concrete, NTPEP, No restrictions. This document is available to the Retroreflectivity, Durability public through NTIS: National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 19. Security Classif.(of this report) 20. Security Classif.(of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 66 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized EFFECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKING MATERIALS AND APPLICATIONS FOR PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE ROADWAYS by Timothy J. Gates Associate Transportation Researcher Texas Transportation Institute H. Gene Hawkins, Jr., Ph.D., P.E. Division Head Texas Transportation Institute and Elisabeth R. Rose Assistant Transportation Researcher Texas Transportation Institute Report 4150-2 Project Number 0-4150 Research Project Title: Evaluation of Pavement Marking Effectiveness Sponsored by the Texas Department of Transportation In Cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration July 2003 TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 DISCLAIMER The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). The United States Government and the State of Texas do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objectives of this report. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The engineer in charge was H. Gene Hawkins, Jr., P.E. #61509. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was conducted in cooperation with TxDOT and the Federal Highway Administration. The authors would like to thank the project director, Greg Brinkmeyer of the TxDOT Traffic Operations Division, for providing guidance and expertise on this project. The authors would also like to thank all of the state DOT and pavement marking industry personnel who provided survey information for this report. The authors would especially like to thank Mujeeb Basha from American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and David Kuniega from Pennsylvania DOT for their assistance with NTPEP reports and data interpretation. v i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures...............................................................................................................................ix List of Tables..................................................................................................................................x Chapter 1: Introduction ...............................................................................................................1 Pavement Marking Performance Measures.................................................................................3 Problem Statement ......................................................................................................................4 Objective and Tasks ....................................................................................................................5 Task Descriptions........................................................................................................................6 Literature Review....................................................................................................................6 NTPEP Evaluations.................................................................................................................6 State DOT Survey ...................................................................................................................7 Industry Survey .......................................................................................................................8 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis....................................................................................................9 Chapter 2: Thermoplastic ..........................................................................................................11 Texas Thermoplastic .................................................................................................................11 Performance on Concrete..........................................................................................................12 Bonding Capabilities.............................................................................................................12 NTPEP Performance .............................................................................................................15 Nationwide Use on Concrete.....................................................................................................17 Surface Preparation and Primers...............................................................................................18 Summary of Thermoplastic Findings........................................................................................18 Chapter 3: Epoxy ........................................................................................................................21 Performance on Concrete..........................................................................................................21 Nationwide Use on Concrete.....................................................................................................23 Summary of Epoxy Findings ....................................................................................................23 Chapter 4: Permanent Preformed Tape ...................................................................................25 Performance on Concrete..........................................................................................................25 Nationwide Use on Concrete.....................................................................................................26 Summary of Permanent Preformed Tape Findings...................................................................27 Chapter 5: Polyurea....................................................................................................................29 Performance on Concrete..........................................................................................................29 Nationwide Use on Concrete.....................................................................................................30 Summary of Polyurea Findings.................................................................................................31 Chapter 6: Other Materials........................................................................................................33 Methyl Methacrylate (MMA)....................................................................................................33 Performance on Concrete......................................................................................................33 Nationwide Use on Concrete.................................................................................................34 Summary of Methyl Methacrylate Findings .........................................................................34 Modified Urethane ....................................................................................................................35 Waterborne Paints .....................................................................................................................36
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Module 6. Hov Treatments
    Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS Module 6. TABLE OF CONTENTS MODULE 6. HOV TREATMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 6.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................ 6-5 TREATMENTS ..................................................... 6-6 MODULE OBJECTIVES ............................................. 6-6 MODULE SCOPE ................................................... 6-7 6.2 DESIGN PROCESS .......................................... 6-7 IDENTIFY PROBLEMS/NEEDS ....................................... 6-7 IDENTIFICATION OF PARTNERS .................................... 6-8 CONSENSUS BUILDING ........................................... 6-10 ESTABLISH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................... 6-10 ESTABLISH PERFORMANCE CRITERIA / MOES ....................... 6-10 DEFINE FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ............................. 6-11 IDENTIFY AND SCREEN TECHNOLOGY ............................. 6-11 System Planning ................................................. 6-13 IMPLEMENTATION ............................................... 6-15 EVALUATION .................................................... 6-16 6.3 TECHNIQUES AND TECHNOLOGIES .................. 6-18 HOV FACILITIES ................................................. 6-18 Operational Considerations ......................................... 6-18 HOV Roadway Operations ...................................... 6-20 Operating Efficiency .......................................... 6-20 Considerations for 2+ Versus 3+ Occupancy Requirement ............. 6-20 Hours of Operations ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Replacement of Davis Avenue Bridge Over Indian Harbor Bridge No
    REPLACEMENT OF DAVIS AVENUE BRIDGE OVER INDIAN HARBOR BRIDGE NO. 05012 November 19, 2019 1 MEETING AGENDA • Project Team • Project Overview • Existing Conditions • Alternatives Considered • Traffic Impacts • Proposed Alternative • Railing Options • Construction Cost / Schedule • Contact Information • Questions 2 PROJECT TEAM Town of Greenwich Owner Alfred Benesch & Company Prime Consultant, Structural, Highway, Hydraulic, Drainage Design GZA GeoEnvironmantal Inc. Environmental Permitting Didona Associates Landscape Architects, LLC Landscaping Services, Planning 3 LOCATION MAP EXIT 4 EXIT 3 BRIDGE LOCATION 4 AERIAL VIEW BRIDGE LOCATION 5 PROJECT TIMELINE CURRENT PROJECT STATUS INVESTIGATION ALTERNATIVES PRELIMINARY FINAL CONSTRUCTION PHASE ASSESSMENT DESIGN DESIGN Spring to Fall 2020 February 2018 to June 2018 to January 2019 to May 2019 to May 2018 January 2019 April 2019 December 2019 6 PROJECT GOALS • Correct Existing Deficiencies of the Bridge (Structural and Functional) • Improve Multimodal Traffic Flow at Bridge Crossing (Vehicles / Bicycles / Pedestrians) • Maintain / Enhance Safety at Bridge Crossing • Meet Local, State, and Federal Requirements 7 EXISTING BRIDGE – BRIDGE PLAN 8 EXISTING BRIDGE – CURRENT PLAN VIEW 9 EXISTING BRIDGE Existing Bridge Data • Construction Year: 1934 • Structure Type: Concrete Slab Supported on Stone Masonry Abutments and Pier • Structure Length: 37’‐3” (17’‐1” Span Lengths) • Bridge Width: 43’+ (Outside to Outside) • Lane Configuration: Two Lanes, Two 4’ Sidewalks • Existing Utilities: Water, Gas (Supported
    [Show full text]
  • CONCRETE Pavingtechnology Concrete Intersections a Guide for Design and Construction
    CONCRETE PAVINGTechnology Concrete Intersections A Guide for Design and Construction Introduction Traffic causes damage to pavement of at-grade street and road intersections perhaps more than any other location. Heavy vehicle stopping and turning can stress the pavement surface severely along the approaches to an intersection. The pavement within the junction (physical area) of an intersection also may receive nearly twice the traffic as the pavement on the approaching roadways. At busy intersections, the added load and stress from heavy vehicles often cause asphalt pavements to deteriorate prematurely. Asphalt surfaces tend to rut and shove under the strain of busses and trucks stopping and turning. These deformed surfaces become a safety concern for drivers and a costly maintenance problem for the roadway agency. Concrete pavements better withstand the loading and turning movements of heavy vehicles. As a result, city, county and state roadway agencies have begun rebuilding deteriorated asphalt intersections with con- crete pavement. These agencies are extending road and street system maintenance funds by eliminating the expense of intersections that require frequent maintenance. At-grade intersections along business, industrial and arterial corridor routes are some of the busiest and most vital pavements in an urban road network. Closing these roads and intersections for pavement repair creates costly traffic delays and disruption to local businesses. Concrete pavements provide a long service life for these major corridors and intersections. Concrete pavements also offer other advantages for As a rule, it is important to evaluate the existing pave- intersections: ment condition before choosing limits for the new concrete pavement. On busy routes, it may be desir- 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Concrete Sidewalk Specifications
    CONCRETE SIDEWALK SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with these specifications and the requirements of the State of Wisconsin, Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, Current Edition (hereafter “Standard Specifications”). Concrete sidewalks shall conform to the lines and grades established by the City Engineer. All removal and replacements will be made as ordered by the City Engineer. The Contractor shall construct one-course sidewalks of a minimum thickness of four (4) inches in accordance with the plans and specifications. Sidewalk through a driveway section shall be a minimum thickness of six (6) inches. Concrete driveway approaches shall be a minimum thickness of six (6) inches. SUBGRADE A new sub-base may be required by the Engineer if, in his opinion, the soil in the subgrade is soft or spongy in places and will swell or shrink with changes in its moisture content. If a new sub- base is required, it shall consist of granular material and shall be spread to a depth of at least three (3) inches and thoroughly compacted. While compacting the sub-base the material shall be thoroughly wet and shall be wet when the concrete is deposited but shall not show any pools of water. If the Contractor undercuts the subgrade two (2) inches or more, he shall, at his expense, bring the subgrade to grade by using gravel fill and it shall be thoroughly compacted. Where sidewalk is placed over excavations such as tree roots or sewer laterals, four (4) one-half (1/2) inch reinforcing bars shall be placed to prevent settling or cracking of the sidewalk.
    [Show full text]
  • Concrete Pavementspavements N a a T T I I O O N N a a L L
    N N a a t t i i o o n n a a Technical Services l l , R R o o u u n n d d a a b b o o Vail, Colorado u u t t May 22-25, 2005 Steve Waalkes, P.E. C C o o n n f f e e r r e e Managing Director n n c American Concrete Pavement Association c e e 2 2 0 0 0 0 5 5 TRB National Roundabouts Conference D D Concrete Roundabouts R R Concrete Roundabouts A A F F T T N N a a Flexible Uses liquid asphalt as binder Pro: usually lower cost Con: requires frequent maintenance & rehabilitation t t i i Asphalt o o n n a a l l R R o o u u n n d d a a b b o o u u t t C C Terminology Terminology o o n n f f e e r r e e n n c c e e 2 2 0 0 0 0 5 5 D D R R A A Rigid Uses cement as binder Pro: longer lasting Con: higher cost Concrete F F T T N N a a t t i i o o n n a a l l R R o o u u n n d d a a b b o o u u t t C C o o s n n c f f e i e r r t e e n n e y c c t e h e t 2 2 e 0 0 f s 0 0 aterials onstructability a e conomics 5 erformance (future maintenance) 5 Why Concrete Roundabouts? Why Concrete Roundabouts? D D E C P M R R • • • • •S •A A A F F T T Realize there is a choice N N a a t t i i o o n n a a l l R R o o u u n n d d a a b b o o u u t t C C o o n n f f e e r r e e n n c c e e 2 2 0 0 0 0 What performance characteristics of Where do we typically use concrete pavement? (situations, traffic conditions, applications, etc.) concrete pavement make it the best choice for roundabouts? 5 5 Why Concrete Roundabouts? Why Concrete Roundabouts? D D R R 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 1.1 What Is Concrete Masonry?
    1.1 What is Concrete Masonry? Introduction Concrete masonry construction (or as it is more and Specifiers are using Architectural Masonry in commonly called, concrete blockwork) is based on more commercial and residential applications. thousands of years experience in building structures of stone, mud and clay bricks. Blockwork masonry Using the various textures of Fair Face, Honed and units are hollow and are filled with concrete and Splitface is adding a lot more variety to the features allow for the integration of reinforcing steel, a feature of the wall. essential for earthquake resistant design. Concrete blockwork provides a structural and architectural advantage in one material and is recognised worldwide as a major contributor to the construction and building industry. Types of Concrete Blockwork The workhorse of concrete masonry has traditionally been stretcher bond blockwork forming structural, fire and acoustic functions from residential to large commercial buildings as well as the special use in retaining walls. With the introduction of coloured masonry Architects Figure 1: Commercial Stretcher Bond Blockwork Figure 2: Coloured Honed Blockwork Figure 3: Coloured Honed Blockwork Figure 4: Coloured Fairface, Honed and Splitface Blockwork Figure 5: Splitface Blockwork New Zealand Concrete Masonry Association Inc. Figure 6: Honed Half High Blockwork Figure 7: Honed Natural Blockwork There are also masonry blocks that include polystyrene inserts which provide all the structural benefits of a normal masonry block with the added advantage of built-in insulation. Building with these blocks removes the need for additional insulation - providing the added design flexibility of a solid plastered finish both inside and out. The word “Concrete Masonry” also encompasses a wide variety of products such as, brick veneers, retaining walls, paving and kerbs.
    [Show full text]
  • Pavement Marking Handbook
    Pavement Marking Handbook August 2004 © 2004 Texas Department of Transportation All rights reserved Pavement Marking Handbook August 2004 Manual Notices Manual Notice 2004-1 To: Recipients of Subject Manual From: Carlos A. Lopez, P.E. Traffic Operations Division Manual: Pavement Marking Handbook Effective Date: August 2004 Purpose and Content This handbook provides information on material selection, installation, and inspection guidelines for pavement markings. It is targeted for two audiences — engineering personnel and field personnel. The portion for engineering personnel provides information on selecting pavement marking materials for various applications. The portion for field personnel provides information on pavement marking installation and inspection. Additional information about TxDOT specifications, procedures, and standards applicable to pavement markings are included in an appendix. The manual may be used by designers to help with pavement marking material selection and inspectors in the field. Instructions This is a new manual, and it does not replace any existing documents. Content Cover Table of Contents Chapters 1 through 3 Appendix A & B Review History This manual is the product of a Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) research project. The TxDOT project director is Greg Brinkmeyer of the Traffic Operations Division. The research supervisor is Gene Hawkins of the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI). Tim Gates and Liz Rose of TTI developed most of the material in the handbook. Wade Odell was the research liaison engineer for the TxDOT Research and Technology Implementation Office. (continued...) Review History (continued) This handbook became a reality because numerous individuals were willing to contribute their time, ideas, and comments during the development process. Special credit should be given to a group of TxDOT staff who meet on a regular basis to review drafts and develop material for the handbook.
    [Show full text]
  • Considerations for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lane Conversions Guidebook
    Office of Operations 21st Century Operations Using 21st Century Technology Considerations for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lane Conversions Guidebook U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration June 2007 Considerations for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes Conversions Guidebook Prepared for the HOV Pooled-Fund Study and the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Prepared by HNTB Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. 8283 Greensboro Drive McLean, VA 22102 Under contract to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) June 2007 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or the use thereof. The contents of this Report reflect the views of the contractor, who is responsible for the accu- racy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Department of Transportation. This Report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers named herein. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the objective of this document. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-HOP-08-034 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Consideration for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) to High Occupancy Toll June 2007 (HOT) Lanes Study 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Martin Sas, HNTB. Susan Carlson, HNTB Eugene Kim, Ph.D., Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN CAUSEWAY HAER LA-21 and SOUTHERN TOLL PLAZA Causeway Boulevard Metairie Jefferson Parish Louisiana
    LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN CAUSEWAY HAER LA-21 AND SOUTHERN TOLL PLAZA Causeway Boulevard Metairie Jefferson Parish Louisiana PHOTOGRAPHS COPIES OF COLOR TRANSPARENCIES WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 100 Alabama Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN CAUSEWAY AND SOUTHERN TOLL PLAZA HAER LA-21 Page 1 Location: The Lake Pontchartrain Causeway spans Lake Pontchartrain from Causeway Boulevard in Metairie, Jefferson Parish to Highway 190, Mandeville, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana. The southern Toll Plaza was located at the Jefferson Parish terminus of the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway. The Northern Terminus of the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway is located at 30.365 and -90.094167. The Southern Terminus is located at 30.02 and - 90.153889. This information was acquired using Google Earth imagery. There are no restrictions on the release of this information to the public. USGS Quadrangle maps (7.5 minute series): (north to south) Mandeville, Spanish Fort NE, West of Spanish Fort NE, Indian Beach There are no restrictions on this information. Owner: Greater New Orleans Expressway Commission Present Use: Vehicle Bridge Significance: When completed in 1956, the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway was the world’s longest bridge. This record was broken by completion of the parallel span in 1969. At 23.87 miles long, the Causeway is the world’s longest continuous span over water. The prestressed, pre-cast concrete structural system displays mid-twentieth century technology that typifies modern bridge construction techniques. In addition, the Causeway is significant in the development of the Jefferson and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Cost of Pavement Marking Materials
    Synthesis Report 2000-11 Cost of Pavement Marking Materials Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipient’s Accession No. 2000-11 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date COST OF PAVEMENT MARKING MATERIALS March 2000 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. David Montebello Jacqueline Schroeder 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. Minneapolis, MN 55447 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation Final Report 395 John Ireland Boulevard Mail Stop 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words) Recent changes in laws regarding the use of volatile organic compounds will impact the type of pavement marking material that many communities use to mark/delineate their roads. This report presents information on the various types of pavement marking materials available. It is intended to provide readers with sufficient data to make educated decisions regarding the selection of an appropriate pavement marking material. The report pulls together information on pavement marking material terminology, the various types of pavement marking materials, their durability and their retroreflectivity. Changes in formulas relating to laws regulating the use of volatile organic compounds are explained, as well as the impacts of those changes. Additionally, there is a list of best management practices that can be implemented to enable an agency or community to get the most value for its money.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Interstate 10 Twin Bridge's Collapse During
    Analysis of the Interstate 10 Twin Bridge’s Collapse During Hurricane Katrina By Genda Chen, Emitt C. Witt III, David Hoffman, Ronaldo Luna, and Adam Sevi The Interstate 10 Twin Span Bridge over Lake Pontchartrain north of New Orleans, La., was rendered completely unusable by Hurricane Katrina. The cause of the collapse of the bridges generated great interest among hydrologists and structural engineers as well as among the general public. What made this case study even more important was the fact that two nearby the failure bridges sustained the effects of the same of the Interstate 10 (I-10) storm surge and suffered only light Twin Span Bridge over Lake damage. Lessons learned from this Pontchartrain. Figure 1 shows investigation are invaluable to the I-10 twin bridges and the maintaining the safety of many relationship of the approach’s of the Nation’s coastal and low causeways on both sides river-crossing bridges. of the navigation channel’s high main span. It was determined that air Introduction trapped beneath the deck of the I-10 On October bridges was a major 7, 2005, the contributing factor U.S. Geological to the bridges’ Survey’s (USGS) collapse. This Mid-Continent finding was well Geographic Science supported by Center partnered evidence observed with the University in nearby bridges of Missouri-Rolla that suffered little or (UMR) Natural Hazards no damage. Mitigation Institute to send A similar issue was a reconnaissance team to the noted by engineers during areas around New Orleans, La., the 1993 flooding of the that were damaged by Hurricane Mississippi River.
    [Show full text]
  • The Causeway Bridge Construction, Past & Present
    THE CAUSEWAY BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION, PAST & PRESENT Hossein Ghara, PE, MBA, Volkert Inc., (225)288-1163, [email protected] The Lake Pontchartrain Causeway is a toll bridge which spans over Lake Pontchartrain from Causeway Boulevard in Metairie, Louisiana to Highway 190 at Mandeville, Louisiana. This toll facility is managed by the Greater New Orleans Expressway Commission (GNOEC) and has been listed since 1969 by the Guinness Book of Worlds Records as the World’s longest bridge over water at 23.83 miles long. The Causeway Bridge consists of two parallel bridges designed and constructed in different periods of time. The original bridge is on the West, it opened in 1956 and carries traffic from North to South. The second bridge on the East, opened in 1969 and carries traffic in the opposite direction. Palmer and Baker, Inc., designed the first bridge to exclusively consist of identical panels, caps and pilings. The 56’ long and 33’ wide spans were cast monolithically to allow for all pieces of the bridge to be fabricated offsite, minimizing cost and time required to construct such a large structure. Despite the fact many engineers consider “Accelerated Bridge Construction” (ABC) as a new and innovative bridge engineering phenomenon, the design and construction technologies which was incorporated for this bridge in the 1950’s is a testament to the fact ABC was being implemented in Louisiana long before it received its formal recognition and title. The Louisiana Bridge Company (LBC), a joint venture between Brown and Root, Inc. of Houston, Texas and T.L. James Company of Ruston, Louisiana, implemented Palmer & Baker’s design.
    [Show full text]